SHOWKAT ANWAR BHAT Vs. CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a competing candidate for selection against the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics, advertised in terms of Advertisement Notice No. 4 of 2017 dated 28th of April, 2017, has, on completion of the process of selection and prior to the issuance of the final selection list, filed the instant writ petition for the grant of following relief(s) in his favour:

(2.) The petitioner claims that the inclusion of Professor R. L. Bhat, as an expert member in the Selection Committee is arbitrary, as the same has not been approved by the statutory authority, which is a requirement in terms of the Statute. It is claimed that Professor R. L. Bhat, as an expert member of the Selection Committee, happens to be a guide/ supervisor of respondent No.4, a competing candidate, therefore, his inclusion is not only impermissible in law, but also against the legal proprietary. The petitioner states that the respondent No.4 has pursued M. Phil and is pursing Ph.D. under the supervision and guidance of Professor R. L. Bhat, which reflects official and personal bias, thereby enhancing the possibility of a potential bias, therefore, the selection process is not in accordance with the settled principles of administrative law. Further, the petitioner challenges the selection criteria with reference to providing of separate points to NET/SLET, which, as a matter of fact, is a qualifying test conducted at the National and State levels, respectively. While admitting the allocation of 03 points for NET as being fair, the petitioner, in paragraph No.7 of the writ petition, has questioned the allocation of grant of 02 points for SLET as arbitrary and unreasonable on the ground that awarding of points to NET as well as SLET is only aimed at enhancing the merit position of the respondent No.4 so as to ensure his selection. The challenge to the selection process, as aforesaid, has further reference to the ground taken by the petitioner that the constitution of the Selection Committee/ Interview Panel is in violation of the University Grants Commission Regulations of 2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the candidates who are possessed of NET/ SLET are also given the benefit of award of points for being Junior Research fellows.

(3.) On notice, the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have filed their reply, wherein they have denied all the averments made by the petitioner as regards there being any violation of the norms and the regulations of the University Grants Commission in the whole process of selection. They have further denied the averments made in the writ petition as factually incorrect and legally unsustainable.